Sporting News (http://kansascity.sbnation.com/kansas-city-chiefs/2012/4/23/2968030/2012-nfl-draft-chiefs-could-move-into-top-5-to-take-matt-kalil/in/2595449) is reporting that there is a lot of interest in USC's Matt Kahlil coming from Chiefs camp, and that there is talk that if the prospect falls past the Vikings, that the Chiefs are serious about moving up to #4 to draft him.

The report says the move makes sense, seeing as Albert only has 1 year left on his contract. The draft move would then cause a shift on the line, and have Albert move inside to LG.

We would then have a year to decide to re-sign Albert for the long term to man the LG position, or let him walk and still have Kahlil at a more reasonable salary.

What are the thoughts on this report?

Like it? Love it? Hate it? Not Sure?

jason1981

04-23-2012, 12:10 PM

i say no cuz i think it will cost to much to move up that high.

Jrudi

04-23-2012, 12:33 PM

When I first heard it, I was kinda sketchy about the move, but then I got excited...

The thing that gets me excited about this...Teams don't trade up for players like that unless they feel they are close to competing for a championship and can afford to move up for that 1 player (Atlanta and Julio Jones) or they feel they are in desparate need of some talent (like trading up for a QB)

I don't see the Chiefs thinking they are in desperate need on talent...

So it makes me happy to see that Pioli and company are confident enough to make a move for a player they could see pushing us over the top...A few years ago we had to focus on "Quantity" of picks, we had lots of holes to fill. Now It's nice to see we can shift to focusing on "Quality" picks, and not necessarily worry about having picks in all 7 rounds.

It would get KC excited to see the Chiefs Brass, know what they want, and go after it. Just imagine if we do, and they do move Albert inside (I've been against this for a long time, but Matt Kahlil wasn't available then, and Albert still had more years left on his contract)

Makes sense... Albert gets 1 more year to show how productive he can be at OG (and I think he can) and we re-sign him long-term if it works out, if not we let him walk, and my thoughts are we will see an interior lineman join our roster this year that will be the plan to succeed whomever vacates the LG spot in the next two years. Just imagine a line of Kahlil, Albert, Hudson, Asamoah, and Winston...WOW 3 of five could be pro bowlers at their positions next year! (I think Albert could be a Pro Bowl OG)

I'm liking the looks of that!

Jrudi

04-23-2012, 12:42 PM

We'll maybe this might start looking more likely, Just read this on NFL.com

Sounding like the Vikings may not be taking Kalil, more likely he ends up here???

TopekaRoy

04-23-2012, 01:47 PM

I don't know about this one. I'd rather take DeCastro at 11 and not give up any picks. But what if we stand pat and miss out on both players? Do you go defense and take Kuechly, or trade down and get more picks?

It sure would be nice to know exactly what teams 3-10 are going to do!

According to the draft value chart, trading up from 11 (1250) to 4 (1800) would cost us our 2nd (540), 4th (78) and 7th pick (10). Is Kalil really worth 4 of our 7 picks? I can only see doing this, maybe, if we know for sure that DeCastro will be gone before 11. Even then it seems like an awful lot to give up.

kylebigmac09

04-23-2012, 03:43 PM

We'll maybe this might start looking more likely, Just read this on NFL.com

Sounding like the Vikings may not be taking Kalil, more likely he ends up here???
That seems like something that's just talk. But then again it's not like they're worried about someone moving ahead of them to take Kalil. Very interesting

Jrudi

04-23-2012, 04:09 PM

I don't know about this one. I'd rather take DeCastro at 11 and not give up any picks. But what if we stand pat and miss out on both players? Do you go defense and take Kuechly, or trade down and get more picks?

It sure would be nice to know exactly what teams 3-10 are going to do!

According to the draft value chart, trading up from 11 (1250) to 4 (1800) would cost us our 2nd (540), 4th (78) and 7th pick (10). Is Kalil really worth 4 of our 7 picks? I can only see doing this, maybe, if we know for sure that DeCastro will be gone before 11. Even then it seems like an awful lot to give up.

If we stay put at 11 and DeCastro and Kuechley are both gone I'm bailing out of the 11 spot!

If that is the case I would rather trade back into the mid to late 20s and take a guy like Donta' Hightower or Cordy Glenn.

Believe me, I am a big fan of trading back as well, it was just a surprise to hear these rumors about trading up (which Pioli did say could be a possibility in his pre-draft press conference last week)

texaschief

04-23-2012, 04:35 PM

I feel like I've heard this somewhere before....

pojote

04-23-2012, 05:06 PM

Albert won't be moved to OG.

TopekaRoy

04-23-2012, 05:32 PM

According to the draft value chart, trading up from 11 (1250) to 4 (1800) would cost us our 2nd (540), 4th (78) and 7th pick (10).

I actually did the math wrong here. It would only take the 2nd and 7th pick (550 pts). That would still give us 4 picks in rounds 3-6.

But I agree, Jrudi. If DeCastro and Kuechly are both gone at 11, then you have to trade down. But if we trade up to get Kalil, then it won't matter who is there at 11.

I'd rather trade down and gain picks than trade up and lose them. You can get some good value in later rounds. We only have a big need at 2 positions, OT and NT. The rest of our picks can be BPA / depth picks. That's a pretty good position to be in!

Jrudi

04-23-2012, 05:53 PM

I actually did the math wrong here. It would only take the 2nd and 7th pick (550 pts). That would still give us 4 picks in rounds 3-6.

But I agree, Jrudi. If DeCastro and Kuechly are both gone at 11, then you have to trade down. But if we trade up to get Kalil, then it won't matter who is there at 11.

I'd rather trade down and gain picks than trade up and lose them. You can get some good value in later rounds. We only have a big need at 2 positions, OT and NT. The rest of our picks can be BPA / depth picks. That's a pretty good position to be in!

You know to be honest I really wouldn't mind trading back and taking a guy like Cordy Glenn, because he has experience at both OT and OG...That would leave us options similar to what we would have with Kalil.

Now of course Kalil is a better prospect than Glenn, but we would then have Albert and Glenn that both have experience at both OG and OT, leaving us in a good position to lock up Albert if needed, or have his replacement in hand.

TopekaRoy

04-23-2012, 06:00 PM

You know to be honest I really wouldn't mind trading back and taking a guy like Cordy Glenn, because he has experience at both OT and OG...That would leave us options similar to what we would have with Kalil.

Now of course Kalil is a better prospect than Glenn, but we would then have Albert and Glenn that both have experience at both OG and OT, leaving us in a good position to lock up Albert if needed, or have his replacement in hand.

It's always great to have players that can play multiple positions on the o-line. The Bears signed FA Chris Spencer to take the place of C Olin Kreutz, but Garza did such a good job at C that they left him there. It didn't take long for Spencer to get plugged in at guard when Carimi was lost for the season, though. You usually only keep 8 or 9 O line players on the roster, so having guys that can play multiple positions is a must.

Jrudi

04-23-2012, 06:10 PM

It's always great to have players that can play multiple positions on the o-line. The Bears signed FA Chris Spencer to take the place of C Olin Kreutz, but Garza did such a good job at C that they left him there. It didn't take long for Spencer to get plugged in at guard when Carimi was lost for the season, though. You usually only keep 8 or 9 O line players on the roster, so having guys that can play multiple positions is a must.

And if you really looked at it, we would also have Hudson who has experience at both OC and OG...

Lots of versatility on the line if we add Glenn

Seek

04-23-2012, 06:35 PM

I am guessing that the Chiefs have been in discussions with Alberts Agent and given how upset he was that he did not make the Pro-bowl, make be expecting a contract that the Chiefs are not interested in pursuing. Just as they ignorantly did for Brandon Carr.

If they do make this type of move, it has to be for the fact that they don't think Albert will resign with the Chiefs next year.

OPLookn

04-23-2012, 07:21 PM

I am guessing that the Chiefs have been in discussions with Alberts Agent and given how upset he was that he did not make the Pro-bowl, make be expecting a contract that the Chiefs are not interested in pursuing. Just as they ignorantly did for Brandon Carr.

If they do make this type of move, it has to be for the fact that they don't think Albert will resign with the Chiefs next year.

Carr was a great #2 CB but now he's playing against top talent as their #1. I'm all but sure that Carr is going to get beat like a drum this year. He will get better but in his first year as a #1 he's probably going to have a similar year to Routt.

Albert may want to sign here but Albert is around top 10 talent which means that his agent is going to ask for top 3 or 5 money. Albert has been serviceable and I don't really have anything bad to say about him but I don't want to have to pay him monster money if we can draft someone just as good. Especially if we can get someone that would be even better than Albert.

Here's something else, maybe we trade away Albert to Minnesota and draft Khalil with our 1st. Then pick up a OG since everyone's been saying this years draft is so deep.

On a side note I love how almost every year the closer and closer we get to a draft you hear more and more people saying wow! the draft class this year is deep!. Anyway, if we did what I mentioned above yes we'd have an almost entirely new OLine but new doesn't necessarily mean bad. I mean it's not like the line won't have to learn a new offense anyway...end sarcasm.

Three7s

04-23-2012, 07:46 PM

I'm in favor of this move, but only if they are absolutely 100% certain that they think this can put us over the top. I remember in the past the Chiefs would do this and cost us valuable draft picks. (the Vermeil/Peterson days)

If it makes our running game so good that we just completely destroy teams, then I'm fine with it, even more so than Decastro, since Kalil is said to be a constant pro bowl caliber LT. We'll see what happens.

slc chief

04-23-2012, 07:58 PM

can you say smokescreen all this is

texaschief

04-23-2012, 11:29 PM

Here's the thing: the Chiefs have a GOOD LT who has the capacity to be a GREAT OG. Chief QBs aren't going to lose sleep with Albert being their LT. He's fine at that spot. However, there's no guarantee that the Chiefs will be able to extend him. If the Vikings pass on Kalil at #3 overall, the Chiefs have the opportunity to shore up the 2nd most important position on a football team for the next 5 or more years by trading 2 or 3 picks. Plus, they'll get a MAJOR upgrade for at least 1 year at the OG spot by moving Albert.

Let's say the Chiefs trade their #1 pick this year and their #1 pick next year. Chances are, the Chiefs will be picking in the mid to late 20s next season, so it's not like they're trading 2 top 10 or 15 picks. They'll essentially be solidifying the LT spot by trading a LATE first round pick... I don't think that price is too high.

You're the GM... you try as much as you can to only deal with things you can control. Hypothetically speaking, the Chiefs could re-sign Albert in '13. But there's no guarantee. The Chiefs can control where they pick in the draft. The Chiefs can control a rookie LT for appx 5 years. The only way to control Albert is if you franchise him and pay him the average salary of the top 5 LTs... which, let's be honest... if they were willing to do that, he'd already be signed.

Let's say the Chiefs don't re-sign Albert after 2012. Would you rather have a good LT (Kalil) under control on a rookie salary with the potential to be great with a hole at OG and no first round pick....

OR

Would you rather have a good OG (DeCastro) with the potential to be great, the 27th-ish pick, and a hole at LT that could only be filled by signing a FA LT who wasn't good enough to warrant the contract he wanted from his original team. Great LTs like the one Kalil is projected to be, don't hit the open market, so you won't fill the void that way. Now, instead of having the #11 overall pick to barter, you only have the #27-ish pick with which to trade... this means, the cost by which you will be charged to move from 27-ish to the top 10 to select an elite LT is going to be MUCH more valuable. Moving from the late 20s to the top 5 or 10 will require an entire draft's value worth of picks. Let's say by some miracle an elite, young LT hits the open free agent market... think he's going to come as cheap as a young, elite LT on a rookie contract? Doubtful.

The decision of whether or not to go after Kalil, imo, has less to do with whether Albert is "good enough" at the position and more to do with what offers the most security and value RIGHT NOW. The decision needs to be made with Albert removed from the equation.

If the opportunity arrises for the Chiefs to solidify the LT position by moving up "only" 6 spots and taking Kalil, they should take it. The cost of moving up 6 spots and solidifying the LT spot is MUCH less than waiting and having to plug a hole at LT next season when you're picking late in the 1st.

If you're of the mind that the Chiefs should just wait and take DeCastro, your entire argument is based on the HOPE that the Chiefs can either re-sign Albert, a different expensive LT, or find some way to land a starting LT in the draft using a late 20s first round pick. Each of those options have serious obstacles to overcome... whereas getting the #5 overall would just mean throwing in next year's late first round pick.

If the Vikings pass on Kalil, this could be the Chiefs last chance to land a good, young, elite LT for quite a while.

The ideal situation would be if the Chiefs were able to get Kalil this year, move Albert to OG and then re-sign him for the average contract of the top 5 OGs in the league. Re-signing Albert would free up the 2nd round picks both this year and next in order to draft other positions of need.... such as NT.

texaschief

04-23-2012, 11:51 PM

If the Chiefs don't get Kalil, the potential exists for the loss of Branden Albert to put this team in a VERY bad situation on the offensive line... ESPECIALLY if the player they take this season is NOT DeCastro.

What if the Chiefs don't draft DeCastro AND don't get Albert re-signed? The Chiefs' OL is in a very fragile position right now. It can either become great with a couple picks or tragically horrible for a team ready to make a deep run in the playoffs the next few years.

Three7s

04-24-2012, 12:09 AM

If the Chiefs don't get Kalil, the potential exists for the loss of Branden Albert to put this team in a VERY bad situation on the offensive line... ESPECIALLY if the player they take this season is NOT DeCastro.

What if the Chiefs don't draft DeCastro AND don't get Albert re-signed? The Chiefs' OL is in a very fragile position right now. It can either become great with a couple picks or tragically horrible for a team ready to make a deep run in the playoffs the next few years.
Honestly, it all depends on the Vikings and how much Pioli wants to potentially pay Albert.

jap1

04-24-2012, 01:41 AM

I definitely see what Tex is saying. I just hate moving up in general. If this were to happen, I wouldn't be too upset, though.

I also find it interesting at the timing of this "leaked" info. It was around this time the last couple of years that our draft plans were leaked.

TopekaRoy

04-24-2012, 02:28 AM

TexasChief makes some good points. If we don't move up to get Kalil and someone take DeCastro, then the Chiefs are really screwed. There will still be some great talent at 11 but probably nobody to help our O-line. I want the kind of line we had in the early 2000s. And we aren't that far away with the right moves. We will find out in a couple of days, I guess.

jason1981

04-24-2012, 03:22 AM

i doubt we let albert go. we will resign him. they always preach about keeping our players that we draft. hey better start proving it unkike when they let carr go.

texaschief

04-24-2012, 04:43 AM

Pioli didn't draft Carr or Albert... or Bowe for that matter.

Chiefs777

04-24-2012, 07:26 AM

This report sounds like pure fantasy to me.

IMO, the ONLY way the Chiefs move up that high in the draft and lose valuable picks is to snag a quarterback they feel strongly about.

Albert is a solid LT. Some of you talk like he's the second coming of Richardson. He's good and improving. I have no doubt Pioli will resign him with a reasonable contract when the time comes.

The Chiefs have a good starting lineup, but very little quality depth. I just don't see the logic in giving away high draft picks for positions already filled.

I would welcome a bold move for QB competition though.

:saythat:

chiefnut

04-24-2012, 10:19 AM

i have heard this too coming out of KC, but the plan was to move Albert to guard and put Kalil at LT. i would love that to happen but not at the price of moving up to #5.
I would rather see us take Decastro and give up nothing

pojote

04-24-2012, 10:51 AM

Albert won't be moved to G: http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/rapid-reports/post/18685032

Albert will be resigned or get franchised. Pioli sees in Mims Albert's replacement, so they won't trade for Kalil.

Jrudi

04-24-2012, 10:55 AM

TopekaRoy had mentioned he looked at the math, and we actually would not have to give up next years 1st rounder if we didn't want to...

He had mentioned we the math would work out to where we could give up a 2nd and a 7th...because we are only moving up 6 spots unlike if we were in the mid 20's.

So let me ask you this...What if we were able to give away a 6th this year, and a 2nd NEXT year to jump up and grab him???

Or we give up our 3rd this year and a 6th next year??

Just thinking of possibilities....If we did get rid of a 2nd or a third, my thoughts would be that if there was another player Pioli really wanted he would figure out a way to trade back into the 2nd or 3rd round like he did with Moeaki.

Ryfo18

04-24-2012, 11:03 AM

Guess what folks? It's that time of year again. The time of year when you don't believe anything any team puts out there!

Rumor season!

Seek

04-24-2012, 05:05 PM

Carr was a great #2 CB but now he's playing against top talent as their #1. I'm all but sure that Carr is going to get beat like a drum this year. He will get better but in his first year as a #1 he's probably going to have a similar year to Routt.

Albert may want to sign here but Albert is around top 10 talent which means that his agent is going to ask for top 3 or 5 money. Albert has been serviceable and I don't really have anything bad to say about him but I don't want to have to pay him monster money if we can draft someone just as good. Especially if we can get someone that would be even better than Albert.

Here's something else, maybe we trade away Albert to Minnesota and draft Khalil with our 1st. Then pick up a OG since everyone's been saying this years draft is so deep.

On a side note I love how almost every year the closer and closer we get to a draft you hear more and more people saying wow! the draft class this year is deep!. Anyway, if we did what I mentioned above yes we'd have an almost entirely new OLine but new doesn't necessarily mean bad. I mean it's not like the line won't have to learn a new offense anyway...end sarcasm.

Here is the thing. I left Arrowhead after beating an undefeated Packers team feeling great. They did it by having our corners going man to man and basically shut down the Green Bay passing allowing the rest of the team to focus on the other weapons.

For a team as far under the cap as they are, and a Team who spouts out that you build a team through the draft and sign your own player to let one go for the most penalized CB in the league and for not a whole lot less money is B S...

Regardless of him getting beat like a drum in Dallas, He was one of ours!

Seek

04-24-2012, 05:06 PM

Pioli has historically never drafted Oline in the first round. I don't see why he would change now.

TopekaRoy

04-24-2012, 06:33 PM

For a team as far under the cap as they are, and a Team who spouts out that you build a team through the draft and sign your own player to let one go for the most penalized CB in the league and for not a whole lot less money is B S...

Regardless of him getting beat like a drum in Dallas, He was one of ours!

Carr was very good, but the Cowpies overpaid for him. They were in a much more desperate position than the Chiefs. Pioli has done a good job of maintaining cap space by drafting well, (as did Peterson to some extent) and not overpaying for free agents. Yes, he paid a lot of money for Flowers and Hali, but not above their market value. No matter how good Carr was he is still a #2 corner, at least for the Chiefs, and it would have been foolish to overpay him. In fact Pioli Knew that Carr was so good, that someone would offer him #1 corner money. That's why he did the smart thing and went out and locked up Routt "just in case."

It's not just about "what is a player worth," but "what is a player worth to this team?" Carr's market value based on talent was higher than his value to the Chiefs based on position/need. No team can have the best two or three players in the NFL at every position. That's why you have to make sure you have solid 2nd and 3rd tier players to work in around your superstars.

Jrudi

04-24-2012, 06:42 PM

Pioli has historically never drafted Oline in the first round. I don't see why he would change now.

Because history always shows what someone will do in the future?? Cus last year we all knew he was taking Baldwin because of his draft history...(Baldwin was the 1st WR he had ever taken in the 1st round!) and "NO ONE EVER TAKE A SAFETY IN THE TOP 5" cough cough Eric Berry..Yeah Pioli's draft history sure does tell us his plans for Thursday night.

This make no sense..Looks to me like he spreads the love to any position that has the best player available.

He's hit on a lot more than he has missed, so I trust his judgement, even if history doesn't give us any clues

figcrostic

04-24-2012, 07:10 PM

I don't know about this one. I'd rather take DeCastro at 11 and not give up any picks. But what if we stand pat and miss out on both players? Do you go defense and take Kuechly, or trade down and get more picks?

It sure would be nice to know exactly what teams 3-10 are going to do!

According to the draft value chart, trading up from 11 (1250) to 4 (1800) would cost us our 2nd (540), 4th (78) and 7th pick (10). Is Kalil really worth 4 of our 7 picks? I can only see doing this, maybe, if we know for sure that DeCastro will be gone before 11. Even then it seems like an awful lot to give up.

Yeah Decastro is the smart choice, and I'm guessing as good as Decastro is he'd be just as good at LT as Albert if he leaves next year.

Three7s

04-24-2012, 07:44 PM

Yeah Decastro is the smart choice, and I'm guessing as good as Decastro is he'd be just as good at LT as Albert if he leaves next year.
And a reason for drafting DeCastro surfaces. IF he has the ability to play LT at a high level, that is.

figcrostic

04-24-2012, 08:16 PM

And a reason for drafting DeCastro surfaces. IF he has the ability to play LT at a high level, that is.

I think he is just as capable if not more capable then Alberts both played guard in college except Decastro would be considered the better player. Pioli does like drafting guys out of position, Decastro could come in and solidify the guard position and very easily take over for Alberts.

texaschief

04-24-2012, 09:08 PM

Drafting DeCastro to play anything but OG is stupid... he would be worse at LT than Albert. He's never played the position... unlike Albert when he came into the league. If you're going to draft a replacement for Albert, draft a pure LT... period. Don't draft an OG and HOPE he can fill in at an average level in case Albert isn't re-signed... that's ridiculous.

If they draft DeCastro, he should ONLY play OG... otherwise, why are you taking him at #11 overall??? Expecting him to play at a high level at LT is unfair to him and unfair to the franchise if you're going to spend a first round pick on him. Make him change positions and he's no longer worth #11 overall. He's a project that should go no higher than the third round as a LT.

figcrostic

04-24-2012, 10:13 PM

Drafting DeCastro to play anything but OG is stupid... he would be worse at LT than Albert. He's never played the position... unlike Albert when he came into the league. If you're going to draft a replacement for Albert, draft a pure LT... period. Don't draft an OG and HOPE he can fill in at an average level in case Albert isn't re-signed... that's ridiculous.

If they draft DeCastro, he should ONLY play OG... otherwise, why are you taking him at #11 overall??? Expecting him to play at a high level at LT is unfair to him and unfair to the franchise if you're going to spend a first round pick on him. Make him change positions and he's no longer worth #11 overall. He's a project that should go no higher than the third round as a LT.

I don't think we should draft Decastro because we could make him a LT I think we should draft him because he is an amazing player, and if Albert left he "could" key word "could" replace Albert at LT either way he's a great player.

bricooper78

04-24-2012, 10:32 PM

I like the idea from earlier, resign Albert, and have DeCastro too! woot woot bust out that cake, and eat it! yeeeeeea!

texaschief

04-24-2012, 10:49 PM

I like the idea of trading up for Kalil and then re-signing Albert. I feel Kalil/Albert -picks > Albert/DeCastro +picks

figcrostic

04-24-2012, 10:55 PM

I like the idea of trading up for Kalil and then re-signing Albert. I feel Kalil/Albert -picks > Albert/DeCastro +picks

That doesn't make sense at all, your going to give up all those picks to get a very good college LT and also resign your already good (not great) NFL LT.....why would we do that?

Three7s

04-24-2012, 11:26 PM

That doesn't make sense at all, your going to give up all those picks to get a very good college LT and also resign your already good (not great) NFL LT.....why would we do that?
Because he would be an all-pro guard?

figcrostic

04-24-2012, 11:31 PM

Because he would be an all-pro guard?

so would Decastro and we could keep our picks

chief31

04-24-2012, 11:43 PM

I like the idea of trading up for Kalil and then re-signing Albert. I feel Kalil/Albert -picks > Albert/DeCastro +picks

I am not starving for this move, as I have been in recent years.

But I can't help but smile at the thought.

Unfortunately, if Albert is moved to OG then I think that seals the deal for Albert, and he will go on the market as a LOT. That will not work out well for him either.

But then... there is always the franchise tag too. :D

so would Decastro and we could keep our picks
And you miss out on a potential Willie Roaf at LOT.

IF we were capable of retaining Albert at OG, then this becomes a no-brainer move to me. Albert was every bit the OG prospect that Decastro is, and he has been playing in The NFL for several years now. He would be the better choice for an OG and Khalil is the better choice at LOT.

figcrostic

04-24-2012, 11:53 PM

I am not starving for this move, as I have been in recent years.

But I can't help but smile at the thought.

Unfortunately, if Albert is moved to OG then I think that seals the deal for Albert, and he will go on the market as a LOT. That will not work out well for him either.

But then... there is always the franchise tag too. :D

And you miss out on a potential Willie Roaf at LOT.

IF we were capable of retaining Albert at OG, then this becomes a no-brainer move to me. Albert was every bit the OG prospect that Decastro is, and he has been playing in The NFL for several years now. He would be the better choice for an OG and Khalil is the better choice at LOT.

Theres no gurantee he's going to be Willie Roaf. I like Kalil a lot but guys he only played one year, it was a hell of a year but only one year a LT I'm not willing to call him Jake Long caliber or anywhere near Willie Roaf, and if you think We are going to pay Albert the kind of money he wants to be our OG you got to be crazy he's a LT and a pretty decent one, he's going to be wanting 10 mil+ and theres no OG worth that, he will leave and become a starting LT of some other team. Oh and hell no Decastro is the better college player, we'll see at NFL but college Decastro > Albert. I don't even know why we are arguing we aren't getting Kalil. Honestly I think our team is so stacked I don't care if we pick up Tannehill's overrated butt we are going to crush other teams this year

nigeriannightmare

04-25-2012, 12:00 AM

That doesn't make sense at all, your going to give up all those picks to get a very good college LT and also resign your already good (not great) NFL LT.....why would we do that?

Because we would have two pro bowlers ibstead of ine. Albert, imo, wont be a probowler at LT, hell excel at guard. And if kalil were to grt hurt we would have someone to move to LT. Better options yo.

figcrostic

04-25-2012, 12:12 AM

Because we would have two pro bowlers ibstead of ine. Albert, imo, wont be a probowler at LT, hell excel at guard. And if kalil were to grt hurt we would have someone to move to LT. Better options yo.

:mancard:

chief31

04-25-2012, 12:14 AM

Theres no gurantee he's going to be Willie Roaf.

Hence the usage of the word "potential".

I like Kalil a lot but guys he only played one year, it was a hell of a year but only one year a LT I'm not willing to call him Jake Long caliber or anywhere near Willie Roaf,

Well, I make no claim to be a Khalil expert, or anything. But if he is ranked this high as a consensus, then he has be a real strong prospect.

and if you think We are going to pay Albert the kind of money he wants to be our OG you got to be crazy he's a LT and a pretty decent one, he's going to be wanting 10 mil+ and theres no OG worth that, he will leave and become a starting LT of some other team.

Just speculation, but it has taken him several seasons to get decent at playing our LOT. And he will be on a limited market for zone-blocking LOTs, or will have to re-invent himself again.

The market will be pretty thin for a guy coming off a year at OG trying to get a starting LOT gig.

Oh and hell no Decastro is the better college player, we'll see at NFL but college Decastro > Albert. I don't even know why we are arguing we aren't getting Kalil. Honestly I think our team is so stacked I don't care if we pick up Tannehill's overrated butt we are going to crush other teams this year

I don't think it will happen either. But I will be pretty satisfied if it does.

texaschief

04-25-2012, 12:51 AM

Again, dealing with the things you CAN control, trading up to secure your LT spot for the next 5-6 years is a no-brainer. Albert re-signing is no guarantee. If you have a deal in place to grab Kalil, that is something you CAN control. Worry about the cost later. Left tackle isn't one of those positions where you try to find a bargain. Either the prospect has the size and talent or he doesn't. We saw what this organization looked like between Roaf and Albert... it wasn't pretty.

But now, you're advocating that the Chiefs ignore the opportunity to lock up the LT position and HOPE Albert re-signs?? That's how franchises and winning opportunities are destroyed.

Like I said, I'd MUCH rather have a hole at OG than LT if the Chiefs can't re-sign Albert. OGs are MUCH easier to find than legit LTs. Moving up in the draft is WELL worth the investment if it's for a franchise LT... AND ONLY A FRANCHISE LEFT TACKLE.

HaliForPresident

04-25-2012, 01:21 AM

Ok first off Kalil would solidify the LT spot more for like 10 years. Kalil should never be compared to Roaf nor should any prospect out of college. In all the decades the NFL has been around Roaf is possibly the best LT to ever play, or at least top 5. That's about like saying Anthony Davis could be the next Magic Johnson. Kalil more realistically really could be like the next Jake Long. Also, despite what people seem to think Guards are not simply the guys that weren't good enough for OT. DeCastro is the prototype of that exactly, an aggressive mean brick s@@@ house blocker that is a perfect OG but doesn't have the athleticism to play OT. Just like with DEs and OLBs there are some guys you can interchange and many you can't. Also, Chiefs were smart to let Carr, we would have had to pay him as much as Flowers and he's not near as good. I say the Chiefs go all out for Kalil, a guy that is as safe a pick as you'll find and he plays the most important position in the offense (besides QB of course). Albert may find he can make just as much money as an elite OG as compared to average OT (Nicks is set to make over 11 million a year at OG).

Ryfo18

04-25-2012, 01:45 AM

I think there is a lot of talk this year (finally) about how overvalued the LT position really is. I've been saying it for the last few years, and showed in past posts that there is really no correlation between having an elite offensive tackle and winning football games.

Here's a quote from this year from Leslie Frazier:

"You've got to really weigh your options," Frazier told The Star Tribune (http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/148357205.html) in a story published Sunday. "Because the philosophy (in the NFL) has always been to get the game-changer. And left tackle is not necessarily the game-changer. Usually game-changers are the guys who can score you points. Receivers. Quarterbacks. So what are we measuring that left tackle against? It's a loaded debate."

Albert has gotten better every year, something many said was impossible because "he was at his peak as a LT." He was one of the best pass blockers in 2011 according to ProFootballFocus.com, though many will discount their methods of grading tackles.

No LT on that list would even be considered anywhere near elite. The opposite is true though, David Diehl is consistently one of the worth LT's in the league, and the Giants have won 2 Super Bowls in the last 5 years with him.

Then you can look at teams that have taken LT's early (top 10), and their records since:

Now of all those picks in the last 5 years, those teams don't have a lot of >.500 seasons among them. The Bengals have two of them, and Andre Smith plays right tackle! The Browns have the best left tackle in the league in Joe Thomas, and they haven't won more than 5 games since 2007!

All I'm saying is that it would be silly to trade future draft picks to move up and take Kalil. We have a solid LT in Albert, albeit his contract is up after this year I believe. Nevertheless, our tackle position looks very solid going into this year with Albert and Winston. Moving up to take a position that isn't needed is foolish.

Ryfo18

04-25-2012, 01:58 AM

Here's some more reading material on the LT being overrated:

Are left tackles overvalued by the NFL? - AFC East Blog - ESPN (http://espn.go.com/blog/afceast/post/_/id/14677/are-left-tackles-overvalued-by-the-nfl)

This guy wrote a whole book using statistics to back up his point on why they are overrated:

Amazon.com: Blindsided: Why the Left Tackle is Overrated and Other Contrarian Football Thoughts (9780470124093): KC Joyner: Books@@AMEPARAM@@http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/516opXko5XL.@@AMEPARAM@@516opXko5XL

HaliForPresident

04-25-2012, 02:13 AM

Ya and also only 2 of the past 5 super bowl championship teams had elite QBs too. Anyone who claims Eli and Big Ben are elite QBs are watching too many analysts on ESPN that just say what fans want to hear (e.i. Skip Bayless). Steelers and Giants won despite their QBs not being elite. They won because of their defense.

TopekaRoy

04-25-2012, 03:22 AM

Here's some more reading material on the LT being overrated:

Are left tackles overvalued by the NFL? - AFC East Blog - ESPN (http://espn.go.com/blog/afceast/post/_/id/14677/are-left-tackles-overvalued-by-the-nfl)

This guy wrote a whole book using statistics to back up his point on why they are overrated:

Amazon.com: Blindsided: Why the Left Tackle is Overrated and Other Contrarian Football Thoughts (9780470124093): KC Joyner: Books (http://www.amazon.com/Blindsided-Overrated-Contrarian-Football-Thoughts/dp/0470124091)

Wait. Now I'm confused. So you are saying it's better NOT to have an elite left tackle?

He may not win you a Super Bowl, but I would think that having one is better than not having one. I could be wrong, though.

Convince me! :D

TopekaRoy

04-25-2012, 03:25 AM

By the way, I quit reading the article as soon as I saw that KC Joiner wrote the book and "Other Contrarian Football Thoughts" was in the title. KC Joiner is ESPN's version of My Man Orton!

Chiefs777

04-25-2012, 07:15 AM

:mancard:

That's funny chit.

Chiefs777

04-25-2012, 07:29 AM

Ya and also only 2 of the past 5 super bowl championship teams had elite QBs too. Anyone who claims Eli and Big Ben are elite QBs are watching too many analysts on ESPN that just say what fans want to hear (e.i. Skip Bayless). Steelers and Giants won despite their QBs not being elite. They won because of their defense.

Huh? Are you basing those ideas on fantasy football stats or what?

You have a good point about the good defenses on those teams, but you're nuts to think those QB's aren't any good. Those quarterbacks helped win those games just as much as the defenses did.

I'd take either one of those guys over Cassel in a second.

They've both won 2 superbowls each! Come on.

70 chiefsfan70

04-25-2012, 08:56 AM

Ya and also only 2 of the past 5 super bowl championship teams had elite QBs too. Anyone who claims Eli and Big Ben are elite QBs are watching too many analysts on ESPN that just say what fans want to hear (e.i. Skip Bayless). Steelers and Giants won despite their QBs not being elite. They won because of their defense.

I will have to disagree. Eli in my opinion is the smartest qb in the league today, This guy is far better then his PONY BROTHER. Eli had very little around him when he was drafted. He does not have the athlete abilities some of the other top qb's have but what he lacks he makes up in smarts. There is a reason they were counted out last year, it was nearly impossible for them to make the playoffs and yet they did. Eli is Elite! But thats just my opinion.

Ryfo18

04-25-2012, 12:48 PM

By the way, I quit reading the article as soon as I saw that KC Joiner wrote the book and "Other Contrarian Football Thoughts" was in the title. KC Joiner is ESPN's version of My Man Orton!

Here's a quote from Greg Cosell, who is widely regarded by many as one of the best film study guys in the business:

"Interestingly, that's exactly the point NFLFilms' Greg Cosell made recently. His argument is basically this: of the four "priority positions" -- quarterback, left tackle, pass rusher and shutdown cornerback -- left tackle has become less important because "The elite quarterbacks camouflage and compensate for offensive line deficiencies in many ways. … It's often the case that the quarterback takes care of the impact pass rusher with his advanced abilities both pre- and post-snap." Cosell adds: "In a passing league, it clearly makes sense defensively to do two things: rush the quarterback and cover receivers." "

The full article is here:

Vikings head coach: 'left tackle is not necessarily the game-changer' - CBSSports (http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/blog/eye-on-football/18796923/vikings-head-coach-left-tackle-is-not-necessarily-the-gamechanger)

OPLookn

04-25-2012, 01:31 PM

Here is the thing. I left Arrowhead after beating an undefeated Packers team feeling great. They did it by having our corners going man to man and basically shut down the Green Bay passing allowing the rest of the team to focus on the other weapons.

For a team as far under the cap as they are, and a Team who spouts out that you build a team through the draft and sign your own player to let one go for the most penalized CB in the league and for not a whole lot less money is B S...

Regardless of him getting beat like a drum in Dallas, He was one of ours!

Carr was very good, but the Cowpies overpaid for him. They were in a much more desperate position than the Chiefs. Pioli has done a good job of maintaining cap space by drafting well, (as did Peterson to some extent) and not overpaying for free agents. Yes, he paid a lot of money for Flowers and Hali, but not above their market value. No matter how good Carr was he is still a #2 corner, at least for the Chiefs, and it would have been foolish to overpay him. In fact Pioli Knew that Carr was so good, that someone would offer him #1 corner money. That's why he did the smart thing and went out and locked up Routt "just in case."

It's not just about "what is a player worth," but "what is a player worth to this team?" Carr's market value based on talent was higher than his value to the Chiefs based on position/need. No team can have the best two or three players in the NFL at every position. That's why you have to make sure you have solid 2nd and 3rd tier players to work in around your superstars.

Topeka answers the Carr part. As for Routt being one of the most penalized that's true...when he was playing in a #1 spot. He's playing in a #2 and he was a very solid #2. I see a return to his #2 numbers which is good because that's what we're paying him for.

texaschief

04-25-2012, 03:38 PM

NOTHING in that article changes the fact that Albert isn't under contract after the '12 season. HOPING Albert signs an extension is sticking your head in the ground and not addressing the situation. Your argument for not taking a LT early in the first should work even stronger for not taking an OG just a few picks later. If a franchise LT isn't worth the pick at #5, a franchise OG (a much less important position and much easier to fill) isn't worth the pick at #11.

You can throw out all the stats you'd like, but until Albert signs on the dotted line, there will still be a need at LT for the future of this franchise and doing nothing but hoping for an extension next year from the incumbent is putting the team in a very bad situation heading into the 2013 season. Of course, this argument is based on not knowing what Pioli knows about the contract negotiations with Albert. Maybe he knows he can get a deal done with Albert if the cards don't fall the way he'd like and can use that as a safety net.

Either way, the future of the LT position needs to be locked up before the first snap of the 2012 season.

Ryfo18

04-25-2012, 04:08 PM

Either way, the future of the LT position needs to be locked up before the first snap of the 2012 season.

Why? There are two more drafts and another free agency period before we're potentially "without" a LT. Why does it have to be addressed this year? Your solution is to trade up (which would likely cost a third, maybe a second) to draft a position which we won't know for sure whether we will even need until next year.

Dwayne Bowe will be a FA next year? Why not trade up and take Blackmon then? Especially since all of the references I've posted are saying how QBs/WRs are more important than your LTs.

The answer? Because it's foolish. There are going to be some solid players available at 11: Kuechly, DeCastro, Barron, Fletcher Cox (maybe)...And you also don't get rid of another high draft pick.

As for DeCastro, I wouldn't mind at all taking him at 11. Some teams have rated DeCastro as the 3rd best tackle in the draft (Source: http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/7412/david-decastro). So either way, you get a franchise LG, and potentially a LT if Albert moves on from the Chiefs next year.

Simply put, there is no reason to panic about the Chiefs and their left tackle situation. There is a whole period of free agency and 14 more rounds of draft picks that will take place before we can officially say "Oh crap, we don't have a LT." Heck, they could even franchise tag Albert next year, then we're talking 2 more free agency periods and 3 drafts to address the tackle position.

HaliForPresident

04-25-2012, 04:18 PM

There is absolutely no chance DeCastro plays LT in the NFL so if Chiefs draft him he will NOT potentially play LT. He's too good at OG and his skill set fills the requirements to be a great OG, not OT. McShay and Kiper both have said this multiple times and they don't consider him a potential OT. That's like moving Berry to CB because a shut down corner is considered more important than safety. You don't just graduate to OT if you get too good at OG, they are two completely different positions.

Ryfo18

04-25-2012, 04:20 PM

There is absolutely no chance DeCastro plays LT in the NFL so if Chiefs draft him he will NOT potentially play LT. He's too good at OG and his skill set fills the requirements to be a great OG, not OT. McShay and Kiper both have said this multiple times and they don't consider him a potential OT. That's like moving Berry to CB because a shut down corner is considered more important than safety. You don't just graduate to OT if you get too good at OG, they are two completely different positions.

I'm just passing on the word...don't shoot the messenger. Obviously if some teams in the NFL think he can play LT, then he can potentially play LT. McShay and Kiper are talking faces for the biggest company in "Sports Entertainment": ESPN.

TopekaRoy

04-25-2012, 04:47 PM

Here's a quote from Greg Cosell, who is widely regarded by many as one of the best film study guys in the business:

"Interestingly, that's exactly the point NFLFilms' Greg Cosell made recently. His argument is basically this: of the four "priority positions" -- quarterback, left tackle, pass rusher and shutdown cornerback -- left tackle has become less important because "The elite quarterbacks camouflage and compensate for offensive line deficiencies in many ways. … It's often the case that the quarterback takes care of the impact pass rusher with his advanced abilities both pre- and post-snap." Cosell adds: "In a passing league, it clearly makes sense defensively to do two things: rush the quarterback and cover receivers." "

This actually reinforces my point. While I don't disagree with his comments, they don't apply to the Chiefs.

#1) Cassel is not an elite quarterback. He can do very well with a good o-line, but he needs more time to throw the ball in order to be effective.

#2) the Chiefs are one of only a few NFL teams that rely heavily on running the ball (to eat up clock, rest the defense, reduce the chances of turnovers and soften opponents defenses against the pass).

I'm still not convinced that moving up to get Kalil will be worth the cost, but having a very good LT is important to this team. We can get by without one only if we can get an elite QB and change our entire offensive scheme. And we aren't going to do that this year.

figcrostic

04-25-2012, 04:55 PM

There is absolutely no chance DeCastro plays LT in the NFL so if Chiefs draft him he will NOT potentially play LT. He's too good at OG and his skill set fills the requirements to be a great OG, not OT. McShay and Kiper both have said this multiple times and they don't consider him a potential OT. That's like moving Berry to CB because a shut down corner is considered more important than safety. You don't just graduate to OT if you get too good at OG, they are two completely different positions.

Isn't that how our current LT got the job?

TopekaRoy

04-25-2012, 05:11 PM

Isn't that how our current LT got the job?

There are some guys who can play both positions, but there are physical differences for the two positions. You want a guard to be big, heavy and hard to move. Tackles tend to be taller and leaner with longer arms and lots of upper body strength. Tackles are also usually more athletic than guards.

A good center can usually play guard, but not necessarily vice-versa. It's usually easier for a tackle to move to guard than the other way around, but it depends on the player.

chiefsflow

04-25-2012, 05:28 PM

Moving up to 5 will cost so much! He seems a good player but not worth what it would cost us.

chief31

04-25-2012, 06:48 PM

Why? There are two more drafts and another free agency period before we're potentially "without" a LT. Why does it have to be addressed this year? Your solution is to trade up (which would likely cost a third, maybe a second) to draft a position which we won't know for sure whether we will even need until next year.

Dwayne Bowe will be a FA next year? Why not trade up and take Blackmon then? Especially since all of the references I've posted are saying how QBs/WRs are more important than your LTs.

The answer? Because it's foolish. There are going to be some solid players available at 11: Kuechly, DeCastro, Barron, Fletcher Cox (maybe)...And you also don't get rid of another high draft pick.

As for DeCastro, I wouldn't mind at all taking him at 11. Some teams have rated DeCastro as the 3rd best tackle in the draft (Source: http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/7412/david-decastro). So either way, you get a franchise LG, and potentially a LT if Albert moves on from the Chiefs next year.

Simply put, there is no reason to panic about the Chiefs and their left tackle situation. There is a whole period of free agency and 14 more rounds of draft picks that will take place before we can officially say "Oh crap, we don't have a LT." Heck, they could even franchise tag Albert next year, then we're talking 2 more free agency periods and 3 drafts to address the tackle position.

That is an interesting situation where you call one a fool for drafting for a position where the current starter only has one year left on his contract, especially since you chose to take that comparison to WR......Johnathan Baldwin.

texaschief

04-25-2012, 06:57 PM

Why? There are two more drafts and another free agency period before we're potentially "without" a LT. Why does it have to be addressed this year? Your solution is to trade up (which would likely cost a third, maybe a second) to draft a position which we won't know for sure whether we will even need until next year.

Dwayne Bowe will be a FA next year? Why not trade up and take Blackmon then? Especially since all of the references I've posted are saying how QBs/WRs are more important than your LTs.

The answer? Because it's foolish. There are going to be some solid players available at 11: Kuechly, DeCastro, Barron, Fletcher Cox (maybe)...And you also don't get rid of another high draft pick.

As for DeCastro, I wouldn't mind at all taking him at 11. Some teams have rated DeCastro as the 3rd best tackle in the draft (Source: http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/7412/david-decastro). So either way, you get a franchise LG, and potentially a LT if Albert moves on from the Chiefs next year.

Simply put, there is no reason to panic about the Chiefs and their left tackle situation. There is a whole period of free agency and 14 more rounds of draft picks that will take place before we can officially say "Oh crap, we don't have a LT." Heck, they could even franchise tag Albert next year, then we're talking 2 more free agency periods and 3 drafts to address the tackle position.

Well, if we don't address the position in this year's draft, that means one draft is out of your equation. Elite LTs don't hit the open market, so there goes that option. As for next year's draft, we'll probably be picking in the mid-late 20s which means we're not getting an elite LT at that spot either without giving up MUCH more than what we would this year by moving up only 6 spots.

We're not trading up for Blackmon because we already got our guy in Baldwin last season... (see the correlation?)

Just because you don't have foresight doesn't mean the LT position doesn't need to be addressed one way or the other.

Ryfo18

04-25-2012, 09:05 PM

That is an interesting situation where you call one a fool for drafting for a position where the current starter only has one year left on his contract, especially since you chose to take that comparison to WR......Johnathan Baldwin.

My whole argument was based on why it was silly to "trade up" for Kalil.

We traded down, picked up an extra pick, AND got Baldwin last year.

Ryfo18

04-25-2012, 09:06 PM

Just because you don't have foresight doesn't mean the LT position doesn't need to be addressed one way or the other.

There seem to be several pretty dang good OL in this draft.. That is the good news.

I personally REALLY think that is the biggest need, even though there is a really good safety to compliment Berry (i can't remember his name) and a pretty beastly ILB, I think the best thing to do, overall, is nab a lineman. It sucks to use such a high pick, but I think that is the best bet for the team.

Chiefster

04-27-2012, 12:12 AM

Well we take Poe; not sure how I feel about that. Would have much rather had DeCastro.

Ryfo18

04-27-2012, 01:42 AM

Well we take Poe; not sure how I feel about that. Would have much rather had DeCastro.

DeCastro will be solid for years to come, but there's a lot to be excited about with Glenn and Silatolu still on the board.